An unknown number of agents appear to be trading illegally following the withdrawal of Ombudsman Services: Property from the sector at midnight on Monday.
A list of firms still thought not to have switched to another redress scheme has been supplied to the regulator, NTSEAT.
However, it is understood that the list is not straightforward and contains, for example, some RICS firms which may have been double-entered. Other firms may also have made the switch but not supplied the information, or have been listed by Ombudsman Services: Property but no longer be in business.
Yesterday, James Munro of NTSEAT told EYE: “The National Trading Standards Estate Agency Team is working with local Trading Standards and housing teams along with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to ensure that estate agents have switched to a valid redress scheme.”
NTSEAT has previously said that it will go after agents not offering redress and who are therefore trading illegally.
A surprising number of agents were still listed as offering redress through Ombudsman Services: Property just 24 hours before its withdrawal.
Comments (8)
It’s a BL00DY EASY exercise for NTSEAT to establish today which Agents aren’t currently Members of a Redress Scheme and are therefore trading outside of the Law.
What you need to ask is why they don’t know today. Or why they didn’t know, say, a year ago – and #DO_SOMETHING then.
Think this in the trade is known as going after the ‘Low hanging fruit’
Not a critisum, just an observation.
They had the opportunity of a large enough ‘glut’ of windfalls in June 2016 to go into commercial cider production if they had wanted to but, a blind eye was turned and many were allowed to turn into rotten apples.
What good is a redress scheme that cannot ask for evidence but rely on written and electronic file
notes? And are not empowered to test the validity of evidence. We all know that notes written are not
worth the paper they were supposed to be written on as for file notes when you need them they will
pop up as required Their has to be a better way of protecting the public.
“Their has to be a better way of protecting the public.”
Yes – there does have to be a better way.
I sat in Brecon 2 years ago and demonstrated a system that highlights to NTSEAT any agent operating without redress who is advertising on the portals. A binary red, green system that would flag up those trading without redress, instantly and daily
I explained that the only barrier to the system being switched on and live was a csv file of members from each of the redress schemes, the difficulty was that the redress schemes were refusing to share data with us even though such a system would benefit the redress schemes by providing a chase up list of prospects.
“That’s easy Robert the redress schemes report to me I will get you that data”
A meeting was organised and I met the various ombudsmen however the data files have never been provided, the meeting was taken off track by two strong personalities** clashing over a single firm that was trading outside regulations
There is a system developed and waiting to be turned on. I paid for it, I built it and I will sponsor it’s day to day running costs, that’s no great philanthropic gesture to the industry it is is a bi product of the agency rating system I’ve been developing.
I am coming at the problem from a different angle; because the regulators are so constrained by budgets they can’t operate as they should or as they would wish, I will provide decent, honest agents a level playing field on which to trade, I will simply create an incorruptible digital platform that spotlights genuine and compliant agencies.
** not me!
NTSEAT are a complete waste of time. No backbone.
“NTSEAT has previously said that it will go after agents not offering redress and who are therefore trading illegally”
NTSEAT has ‘said’ a great deal over the years.